Hansard

I am grateful for the opportunity to debate domestic abuse and how we improve the legislation to better protect victims. It was disappointing that the Scottish Government was unable to complete that work in the previous parliamentary session, but it is welcome that it is bringing the matter back to the Parliament so early in this session.

It is essential to legislate to make all aspects of domestic abuse a crime—not just physical violence, but the emotional abuse and controlling behaviour that perpetrators display. As part of that, we must deal with how the state is used to continue abuse, especially when the victim has taken steps to protect themselves. Far too often, I have cases where the court rules that an abusive parent should also have access to their children. That takes no account of the fact that that access can be used to control the victim further or of the damage that domestic abuse does to children. A number of members have mentioned that, and we received an excellent briefing from Barnardo’s, Children 1st and the NSPCC.

We know that children do not thrive in abusive environments. Abuse affects their ability to concentrate because of the fear that it generates. It also impacts on their self-esteem, which means that it can go on to have a negative impact on them throughout their lives. The Scottish Government apparently accepts that—it funds children’s workers for young people who have witnessed domestic abuse—but it still allows the courts to give the abusive partner access to those children, which enables them to continue to abuse the victim and children.

When it can be proved that children have been physically abused, child protection measures obviously come into play, but that is not the case for emotional abuse. A child who is on a contact visit can be plied for information about their other parent even when the visit is carried out through a contact centre. I have had numerous cases in which a mother has had to move repeatedly because the father has forced the children to divulge where they are living and has used that information to put the family in a state of fear and alarm. That has a huge impact on the child. They feel guilty for having divulged the information in the first place, but they also suffer the insecurity of having to leave friends, school and the like while their mother tries to make them all safe again. It is clear to me that an abusive partner should not have access to their children until they can prove that they are no longer a threat to their ex-partner or to the children.

The same is true of schools. I had a case in which a headteacher told a mother that, if she really cared about her child, she would put her own needs aside and attend a parents night alongside her abusive ex-partner. I find that absolutely unbelievable, but it gives a sense of the scale of the ignorance of domestic abuse that is prevalent in our society. If we are to tackle domestic abuse and coercive control, the state’s role as a tool in that abuse needs to be dealt with, too.

We have seen that domestic abuse courts make a real difference in dealing with victims and perpetrators in such cases. Those involved have a real understanding of abuse and are not so easily fooled by a smart lawyer or a manipulative client. We need that expertise to be rolled out to all courts, even if that would only involve having certain days set aside exclusively for domestic abuse cases. As well as allowing organisations such as Women’s Aid to support their clients in court, it would give them the ability to reach out and support others who have not previously accessed their services.

At the moment, Women’s Aid groups can have different staff members in court every sitting day supporting just one client. While those staff members are in court, they are unable to help others. If they had to be in court for only one day, that would be more efficient use of resources and would free up staff to do the work that they are there to do. That is even more important given the funding cuts that Women’s Aid groups face.

Setting aside days for domestic abuse cases would allow prosecutors and sheriffs to gain a knowledge of domestic abuse, which is sadly lacking in some quarters, and would allow arrangements to be made to keep victims and their families separate from the accused and their families, thereby avoiding chance meetings, which can be particularly terrifying for victims and can provide the opportunity for the perpetrator to undermine the victim.

I am disappointed that the Government has not proposed a bill to give legislative strength to all the aspects of “Equally Safe”. We are all signed up to the strategy, but at times the Scottish Government hardly pays lip service to the provisions within it. I am speaking specifically of commercial sexual exploitation, which is recognised in the strategy as violence against women and girls, but which is left unfettered in Scotland. I ask the Scottish Government to take a serious look at protecting some of the most vulnerable people in our country, many of whom have already been let down by the state. If we take the strategy seriously and act to put measures in place to protect women against violence, we will all be the better for it.